Organic farmers do use pesticides and it is economically difficult not to do so. The forgoing of synthetic pesticides leaves organic farmers using more harmful natural alternatives. Unless a person buys straight from the farm, organic food profits are not going to small farmers. Be informed; look for the certified organic label and follow-up with the USDA Organic Agriculture. The USDA has a list of farms and the regulation along with the laws of labeled certified organic foods.
Mankind doesn’t know the affects GMOs could produce by injecting a gene from another species into a crop. Why would a person risk food security opposed to eating organic foods which have been proven healthy throughout history. In despite of their dangerousness GMO’s have still been able to reach our tables. No one can guarantee how GMOs’ side effects will affect us long-term and proving their safety is almost impossible because we don’t have the technology to prove it. Supporters of genetic engineering argue that altering a crops DNA to improve the nutritional value will help people in third world countries who suffer from malnutrition.
Critics of GE technology claim there are known and unknown health, social, ethical and environmental risks involved with the introduction of this technology. There are also claims that this technology has little if any benefits to the developing world and will in fact only benefit the developed world, and multinational biotech corporations such as Monsanto. Critics argue that whatever benefits developing nations gain from GE technology, these are far outweighed by the risks involved. Proponents’ of genetically modified foods strongest claim is that this technology will be... ... middle of paper ... ...r crops. Therefore, even though it is inevitable that some of Monsanto’s seed is going to travel and end up on another farm, that farm that it lands on could be sued for everything it has.
There are many reasons why organic farming techniques are becoming all the rage, but the most important reasons have to do with preserving people’s health, the animal’s health, and the earth’s health. Organic farmers are as skilled in the use of biological and mechanical controls of insects as conventional farmers are in spraying chemicals. The argument starts because there is no denying that ingesting chemicals are harmful to people. Feeding a kid non-organic apple juice might be like putting Windex in a sippy cup. The word organic refers to a natural method of farming that produces food without using any artificial pesticides, chemicals, or hormones while relying on soil organisms, insects, and birds to keep bugs in check.
So again we have another reason to save money and crops from being wasted. For many places when you have a bad harvest the price of the fo... ... middle of paper ... ...time. The last con is the fact that we have no idea how every genetic change will affect the people, plants, animals, or the environment. Every genetic modification will react in its own way and it is very challenging to predict what will happen. Only time and research can tell what negative response this will have on us or our environment.
This is a great hypothesis, but when you examine the problem this is nearly impossible. Manure is just one of the examples on how the pollution of fertilizers and weed killers could be reduced. Manure is an organic substance that can substitute many other forms of fertilizers. In reality, it would be impossible to cover every acre of farm ground with manure. Society today is led to believe that manure is safe for water and is free of pollution when actually it is not.
Unfortunately, cross-pollination of GM soy plants with wild plants may have lead to unintended transfer of herbicide-tolerant gene, forming “superweeds” that are resistant to glyphosate. Farmers are then forced to spray larger quantities of the herbicide, which in turn, puts their health and ecosystems at risk (Gilbert, 2014). So far, 24 glyphosate-tolerant weed species have been identified since the inception of Roundup-tolerant crops such as GM soybean (Gilbert, 2013). However, there is no causality between GM crops and herbicide-resistant weeds, primarily because “superweeds” have been a problem for farmers regardless of whether they plant GM crops. For example, no GM crops are resistant to the atrazine herbicide, yet 64 atrazine-tolerant weed species have already been recorded (Gilbert, 2013).
Genetic engineering opens the door to new methods for managing Fusarium and other fungal diseases. Scientists have developed genetic approaches to conferring resistance to fungal diseases and are testing their effectiveness on wheat. Field trials have proved very successful in many countries, including countries in Europe, GM wheat plants are resistant to fungal infection and thereby produce grains won’t be laden with dangerous toxins. Crops can be modified to be resistant to specific herbicides; this makes it much easier to control troublesome weeds. Farmers can simply apply the weed killer to a crop field, killing the unwanted plants and leaving the food crop unaffected.
Firstly, farmers do not have to buy and use other insecticides or pesticides, which will overall help their income and even the environment. Another reason GMOs help farmers grow their crops is that they can be modified to help kill weeds. In this case, rather than there being a “weed killer” inside of them, like the insecticide, the plants are modified to do something different. “The two biggest uses for genetic modifi... ... middle of paper ... ...lp grow their crops with made- in insecticides like BT. In addition, some GMOs have plant killer immunization, especially to the weed killer glyphosate.
It can harm organisms that you might not mean to kill. Some people may say that GM crops can stop world hunger. IT WILL NOT! Research shows that some GM crops can not meet the nutritional needs of a human being. It will also not help solve world hunger because some GM crops need many resources to be able for them to produce into healthy crops and poor farmers don’t have much resources.